IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v70y2024i2p751-772.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do Differences in Analyst Quality Matter for Investors Relying on Consensus Information?

Author

Listed:
  • Roni Michaely

    (Faculty of Business and Economics, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong)

  • Amir Rubin

    (Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia V5A 1S6, Canada; Reichman University, Herzliya, Tel Aviv 4610101, Israel)

  • Dan Segal

    (Reichman University, Herzliya, Tel Aviv 4610101, Israel; Warwick University, Coventry CV4 7AL, United Kingdom)

  • Alexander Vedrashko

    (Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia V5A 1S6, Canada)

Abstract

This study investigates whether investors can reap economic benefits from analyzing differences in analyst quality. Although high-quality analysts’ average forecast is more accurate than the consensus forecast for firms with a large analyst following, the benefits of using high-quality analysts’ average forecasts are not economically significant. In contrast, the value of analyst quality differentiation exists in the second moment of forecasts. High-quality analysts’ forecast dispersion gives investors an advantage in dealing with uncertainty by predicting return volatility and providing opportunities for economically significant returns using option straddle and post-earnings announcement drift investment strategies.

Suggested Citation

  • Roni Michaely & Amir Rubin & Dan Segal & Alexander Vedrashko, 2024. "Do Differences in Analyst Quality Matter for Investors Relying on Consensus Information?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 70(2), pages 751-772, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:70:y:2024:i:2:p:751-772
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.2023.4699
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2023.4699
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.2023.4699?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:70:y:2024:i:2:p:751-772. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.